The University and the Union met three times this month on November 6, 7 and 12 for continued negotiations. Over these three sessions, the parties focused on reaching agreement on substantive issues necessary to reach a final agreement. The University is aware that the Union continues to express its dissatisfaction that the parties have not yet entered into an agreement. However, negotiating a first contract is a difficult task. The parties have been negotiating for almost a year and half, which has included responding to numerous information requests from the Union, resolving status quo issues related to faculty terms and conditions of employment, as well as determining cost implications for many of the Union’s particularly lofty proposals. The University takes seriously its obligation to negotiate in good faith with the faculty union and is prepared to continue fruitful discussions on all mandatory subjects of bargaining which are necessary to reach an agreement. Nonetheless, the University is unwilling to compromise on its obligations to its stakeholders, especially its students, in this endeavor.

Prior to these bargaining sessions, the Union’s bargaining team sent the University a counter proposal on Professional Development Leaves and Appointments as well as a package counter proposal on Grievance and Arbitration and Appointment and Promotion of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty.

During the November 6 session, the Union also presented counter proposals on Benefits, Financial Exigency and Academic Reorganization. The University responded to the Union’s counter proposals on Professional Development Leaves and presented its own package counter proposal on Grievance and Arbitration and Appointment and Promotion of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty. The University also presented counter proposals on Compensation, Benefits, Leaves, and No Strike/No Lockout.

At the end of the November 6 session, the parties reached a tentative agreement on Professional Development Leaves and Appointments and were close to reaching agreement on the Grievance and Arbitration and Appointment and Promotion of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty articles. The outstanding issue between the parties on these proposals was the appeal process relating to the revocation of a faculty member’s tenure status.

On November 7, the parties met via Zoom to continue discussion of the proposals presented the day prior. The Union presented counter proposals on Leaves and Compensation as well as a response to the University’s package proposal on Grievance and Arbitration and Appointment and Promotion of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty. The University responded by presenting counter proposals on Leaves, Performance Improvement Plans, Appointment, Renewal and Promotion of TCPL Faculty and Financial Exigency and Academic Reorganization.

At the end of the second day, the Union accepted the University’s November 6th counter proposal on No Strike/No Lockout and the parties signed a tentative agreement on that article. The No Strike/No Lockout article governs the relationship between the University, the Union, and bargaining unit faculty members. It bans interference with the educational mission of the University by preventing strikes, work slowdowns or cessation of work by bargaining unit faculty members. The University also agrees not to lock out any faculty member covered by the CBA.

On November 12, the University and the Union met in-person at Miami’s Voice of America Learning Center. Prior to this session, the Union’s bargaining team provided the University with another package counter proposal on Grievance and Arbitration and Appointment and Promotion of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty. As such, the University began the session by presenting counter proposals on these articles that further clarified the University’s intent regarding the appeal process for revocation of a bargaining unit faculty member’s tenure status, which is only applicable when that faculty member is subject to termination for just cause under the Discipline and Discharge article. The University also explained to the Union that the University’s proposed language in the article expressly limiting the arbitrator’s authority on academic matters is to ensure that when resolving disputes between the University and the Union, the arbitrator does not impose obligations on the parties that were not otherwise agreed to in the CBA. Following this discussion in the joint session, the Union accepted the University’s proposals on these articles, with only minor clarifications relating to the appeal process. The parties then signed a tentative agreement on the package on Grievance and Arbitration and Appointment and Promotion of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty. The University also presented counter proposals on Association Rights, Leaves and Faculty Evaluations.

The Union presented counter proposals on Leaves, Financial Exigency and Academic Reorganization, Intellectual Property and Copyright, Appointment, Promotion and Renewal of TCPL Faculty as well as a package proposal on Management Rights and Association Rights. The Union’s package proposal withdraws its current proposal on Shared Governance, should the University accept in full its package proposal. Additionally, the Union’s Management Rights counter proposal recognizes, for the first time, the University’s managerial right to exercise its authority on decisions involving University academic matters. This package proposal presented by the Union now provides a potential avenue for the parties to begin substantive discussions on these articles that the University hopes will bring the parties closer to reaching an agreement.

The parties are scheduled to meet again on December 3 and 10.